In his answer to this MO question, Karl Schwede claimed that every non-normal variety can be obtained by an appropriate pushout diagram, as sketched in that answer. This would give substance to the heuristics according to which "a normal variety is a variety that has no undue gluing of subvarieties or tangent spaces" (again, see K.Schwede's answer and the examples therein).

Q. Has a proof of that fact been written down somewhere since then? If yes, where? And if not, could anybody who knows it sketch it here on MO?

  • $\begingroup$ Just a comment. One might hope for the following: given a variety $X$ and a proper birational $f:X'\to X$, let $Z\subseteq X$ be the locus where $f$ is not a local isomorphism (with reduced subscheme structure). For $n\geq 1$, let $Z_n$ denote the $n$-th infinitesimal thickening of $Z$ in $X$. Then for $n\gg 0$, $X$ is the pushout of $Z_n \leftarrow f^{-1}(Z_n)\to X'$. To answer your question, we would apply this to the normalization map (as hinted by Karl Schwede). $\endgroup$ Nov 7, 2014 at 1:16
  • $\begingroup$ I think the claim above could follow from some results in Artin's paper "Algebraization of Formal Moduli II", where instead of $Z_n$ we consider their limit (the formal completion). The trick seems to be to choose an appropriate $n\gg 0$. $\endgroup$ Nov 7, 2014 at 1:18

1 Answer 1


A number of people have asked me for a reference since I wrote down that answer in the other question so I'll try to write a reference here (I'm sure some experts knew it before though). I originally wrote a complicated Noetherian induction in this answer but I just realized this is really easy.

Main point: There is a canonical way to find the thickened subschemes that glue to give the non-normal variety. Indeed, the non-normal locus already has a canonical scheme structure. Let's use that!

Suppose $R \subseteq S$ a finite birational extension of reduced rings. Let $I = R :_{K(R)} S = \{z \in K(R)\;|\; zS \subseteq R \}$ (a fractional ideal -- usually called the conductor). Note that $I$ is an ideal of $R$ (since in particular it multiplies $R$ back into $R$) but it is also an ideal of $S$. Indeed, take $s \in S$ and $x \in I$, then $xs$ also still multiplies other $s' \in S$ into $R$ as well.

Theorem: With notation as above if $A$ is the pullback of $\big( S \to S/I \leftarrow R/I \big)$ then $A = R$.

Proof: Obviously we have $R \subseteq A \subseteq S$. We want to show that $R \to A$ surjects as well. Take an element $(s, \overline{r})$ in $A$ (this is a pair of elements $s \in S$ and $\overline{r} \in R/I$ with common image in $S/I$). Let $r \in R$ be any representative for $\overline{r}$. Consider $s - r \in S$. Obviously $s-r$ is sent to zero in $S/I$ and so $s - r \in I \subseteq R$. But then $s \in R$ as well.

The map $R \to A$ sends $x$ to $(x, \overline{x})$. Therefore the map $R \to A$ surjects as claimed. $\square$


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.